Reply to Committee on overcrowding in the Wilson feeder pattern

Forum Index » DC Public and Public Charter Schools

Reply to "Committee on overcrowding in the Wilson feeder pattern "

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]"[b]Bought your house in reliance on Wilson access" is not a property right.[/b] Even if it was, I want it taken away for the good of the rest of us. Move if you want. I want those kids in Ward 1 or 4 schools, or if (when, right PP!?!) you move away, to have your replacements put their kids there.[/quote]

You realize this same mentality applies to kids at Lafayette, right?  You want "those kids" gone but you think your feeder rights are sacrosanct.[/quote]

Exactly - for some reason it was easy for some to suggest that eotp kids don't belong (despite their neighborhoods having long been zoned for Deal and Wilson - which, by the way IS in ward 4), but the idea of Lafayette families giving up Wilson is unthinkable....  Um, and I never said it was a "property right" (however that matters).

What's ok for 16th street heights, crestwood, etc, ought to be ok for those families in Chevy Chase DC too.
[/quote]

Hold on there. It was PP at 14:31 who suggested the Lafayette kids be moved but that families who bought EOTP would keep their rights to Deal/Wilson. How is that any more fair than the other way around?[/quote]

Because the PP at 14:31 brought that up specifically because it would shift a big enough cohort of high-SES kids at once to create a viable high-achieving second DCPS feeder pattern.  Just kicking out the grandfathered kids in the Gold Coast and erasing Shepherd feeder rights would be a much smaller cohort and would not move the needle in the same way -- and that's not why DCUM always reverts to kicking out "those kids."  If you want to talk about fairness at least compare apples to oranges.  14:31 was trying to come up with a politically disastrous idea that would theoretically result in an additional good school for kids to attend.  The "get rid of all those EOTP kids" people are not at all interested in improving outcomes for "those kids."[/quote]

If that was what 14:31 was saying, he/she should not have made the fairness argument in the first sentence and negated later in the post.  Make the argument about moving a large co-hort but don’t pretend it is fair. At least be honest. 
[/quote]

What are you talking about?  The entirety of the post is about how that plan would create another school that could retain high-SES families.  The whole post.  [/quote]

Yes, creating that school by shifting Lafayette out of Deal/Wilson rather than by shifting the EOTP students because it would be unfair to shift one but not unfair to shift the other. [/quote]

Because only the scenario proposed by 1431 actually shifts enough students to accomplish the goal.  Shifting out the EOTP students doesn't move the needle.  The issue is that 1431 was proposing a solution; you're proposing a punishment.[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics